There are enough out there on the Left who claim, surprisingly to me, that there is no leftist bent to the belwethers of the mainstream media (or drive-by media, depending on your perspective and radio listening habits).  I normally don’t think twice about it anymore. It is clear to me there is a subtle undercurrent that determines the perspective from which stories and columns are written. This perspective determines the focus. This is what is meant by a liberal media bias.

It’s not purposeful per se, which is the alarming part. But your objectivity largely rests on your world view. The focus though is certainly consistent - for instance, today the Times has a piece on Bush’s continuing failing in approval polls, even though his overall approval went up two points from last time. Still within the margin of error, but certainly not indicative of a continuing negative trend, on which the Times focuses.

Then there is the Washington Post today, focusing on the extension of capital gains tax cuts about to be passed by the Congress. The sources first cited are clearly those who favor government spending, and who cannot fathom how cuts in investment taxes will result in more revenue (look at the Reagan capital gains cuts in 1986 to see that there is a precedent for that effect), or indirectly, how much growth will occur in the economy because of it, and the revenues that would stem from that. The story cites the $300 billion budget deficit as unmanageable, but historically, that’s not the case

   The increase in receipts in 2004 and 2005 played a significant role in bringing down the size of the deficit. Since the President set a goal of cutting the deficit in half from its projected peak in 2004 of 4.5 percent of GDP, or $521 billion, the deficit has come down markedly. The final 2004 deficit was 3.6 percent of GDP, or $413 billion, and the 2005 deficit fell further, to 2.6 percent of GDP, or $318 billion.

…

While this increase in the deficit is unwelcome, a deficit at this level is still well within the historical range. At 3.2 percent of GDP, it would still be smaller than the deficits in 11 of the last 25 years. More importantly, if we build on the policies of economic growth and spending restraint reflected in this Budget, the deficit is projected to return to its downward trajectory and stay on track to meet the President’s goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009.

Further, the deficit projected for next year is 2.6%, which is less than most of the Clinton years, save the last term before the tech bubble burst. One way to ensure this decline is to ensure growth, something the left has never quite grasped. To paint a budget in deficit as stingy, as the Post does, is irresponsible and on its face, just plain silly. To cite “experts” who claim we absolutely need the money in the extended tax cuts (which, mind you, were not made permanent) requires a musical backdrop of “Bring in the Clowns”.

Read both articles. Notice the layout and the perspective. When conservatives mention a bias in the MSM, this is what we’re talking about.

Now, off to court.